All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Improve latencies under load by decreasing minimum scheduling granularity
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:23:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100913182355.GC20171@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100913181925.GA15107@Krystal>


* Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:

> * Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu) wrote:
> > 
> > * Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > * Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linux-foundation.org) wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers
> > > > <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, the long IRC discussions we just had convinced me that the current scheme
> > > > > takes things into account by adapting the granularity dynamically, but also got
> > > > > me to notice that check_preempt seems to compare vruntime with wall time, which
> > > > > is utterly incorrect. So maybe all my patch was doing was to expose this bug:
> > > > 
> > > > Do you have latency numbers for this patch?
> > > 
> > > Sure, see below,
> > > 
> > > In addition to this patch, [...]
> > 
> > Note, which is a NOP for your latency workload.
> > 
> > > [...] I also used Peter's approach of reducing the minimum granularity
> > 
> > Ok, that's the very first patch i sent yesterday morning - so we also 
> > have my numbers that it reduces latencies.
> > 
> > To move things along i'll apply it with your Reported-by and Acked-by 
> > line, ok?
> > 
> > We can also work on the other, more complex things after that, but first 
> > lets make some progress on the latency front ...
> 
> Yep, that's fine with me.
> 
> Thanks!

You are welcome!

Linus, Mathieu, you can test the granularity reduction patch via:

   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git sched/urgent

Patch also attached below.

Note, i'd like to keep this separate from the check_preempt() change - 
which only affects reniced tasks and isnt essential to these tests. (we 
want such things to be in separate commits, for bisectability)

 Thanks,

	Ingo

------------------>
Ingo Molnar (1):
      sched: Improve latencies under load by decreasing minimum scheduling granularity


 kernel/sched_fair.c |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
index 9b5b4f8..a171138 100644
--- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
@@ -54,13 +54,13 @@ enum sched_tunable_scaling sysctl_sched_tunable_scaling
  * Minimal preemption granularity for CPU-bound tasks:
  * (default: 2 msec * (1 + ilog(ncpus)), units: nanoseconds)
  */
-unsigned int sysctl_sched_min_granularity = 2000000ULL;
-unsigned int normalized_sysctl_sched_min_granularity = 2000000ULL;
+unsigned int sysctl_sched_min_granularity = 750000ULL;
+unsigned int normalized_sysctl_sched_min_granularity = 750000ULL;
 
 /*
  * is kept at sysctl_sched_latency / sysctl_sched_min_granularity
  */
-static unsigned int sched_nr_latency = 3;
+static unsigned int sched_nr_latency = 8;
 
 /*
  * After fork, child runs first. If set to 0 (default) then


  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-13 18:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-11 17:37 [RFC patch 0/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity with nr_running Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-11 17:37 ` [RFC patch 1/2] " Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-11 18:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-11 19:21     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-09-11 20:36       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-11 20:45         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-11 20:52           ` Linus Torvalds
2010-09-12  9:07             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-11 20:48         ` Linus Torvalds
2010-09-12  9:06           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-12  9:14             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-12 20:39               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 12:54                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-12 20:34             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 12:53               ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13  4:35             ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13  8:41               ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 11:22                 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-13 13:52                 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-09-13 13:54                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 14:02                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 14:21                       ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-11 20:52         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-11 19:57     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-12 10:41       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-12 20:37         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 12:53           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 13:15             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 13:56               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 14:16                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 14:43                   ` Steven Rostedt
2010-09-13 15:25                     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 15:39                       ` Steven Rostedt
2010-09-13 16:16                   ` [RFC PATCH] check_preempt_tick should not compare vruntime with wall time Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 16:36                     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-09-13 17:45                       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 17:51                         ` Linus Torvalds
2010-09-13 18:01                           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 18:10                           ` Steven Rostedt
2010-09-13 18:03                         ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-13 18:19                           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 18:23                             ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2010-09-13 18:28                               ` [PATCH] sched: Improve latencies under load by decreasing minimum scheduling granularity Joe Perches
2010-09-13 19:44                               ` Linus Torvalds
2010-09-13 20:00                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-13 18:19                         ` [RFC PATCH] check_preempt_tick should not compare vruntime with wall time Ingo Molnar
2010-09-13 17:36                     ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-13 17:56                       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-14  2:10                     ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13 14:44                 ` [RFC patch 1/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity with nr_running Mike Galbraith
     [not found]               ` <1284386179.10436.6.camel@marge.simson.net>
2010-09-13 15:53                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 18:04                   ` [RFC][PATCH] sched: Improve tick preemption Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-14  2:27                   ` [RFC patch 1/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity with nr_running Mike Galbraith
2010-09-12  6:14   ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-12  7:21     ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-12 18:16       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13  4:13         ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13  6:41           ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-13  7:08             ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13  7:35               ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13  8:35               ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13  9:16                 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13  9:37                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13  9:50                     ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13  9:55                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 10:06                         ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13 10:45                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 11:43                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 11:49                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-13 12:32                             ` Mike Galbraith
2010-09-13 20:19             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-13 20:56               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-12 18:13     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-12 23:44       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-11 17:37 ` [RFC patch 2/2] sched: sleepers coarse granularity on wakeup Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-09-12 12:44 ` [RFC patch 0/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity with nr_running Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100913182355.GC20171@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony@atomide.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.